Gabriella Olivieri Publications Portfolio Annual Report - 2009 | Page 30

is considered a premier of?ce address both nationally and internationally. The building’s owner acquired the property out of bankruptcy in 1992 for $130 million, and gutted and rebuilt the property. The owner challenged City assessments for taxable years 1996/97 through 2003/04. The building was partially owner occupied throughout that period. At trial, the City’s appraiser effectively rebutted the owner’s contention that the existence of owner-occupied space on the date of valuation depressed market value. The trial court sustained the City’s position in all years except for one in which a minor modi?cation was made. The Appellate Division, First Department upheld the City appraiser’s methodology. District Court Holds RLUIPA Does not Apply to Condemnation Proceedings The Division handled a case involving a group of plaintiffs who identi?ed themselves in part as a religious congregation and school. The plaintiffs alleged a number of violations, including violations under the Religious Land Use & Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) in relation to the condemnation of property in Brooklyn. They also argued that the City should issue a special-use permit for the construction of a Yeshiva on the property adjacent to the property condemned by the City. Division attorneys TORT Fay Leoussis , Chief Ellen Lombardi, First Deputy successfully sought dismissal of the case. In its dismissal, the Court held that RLUIPA does not apply to eminent domain proceedings. Furthermore, the plaintiffs’ claim regarding an alleged RLUIPA violation based on the denial of their specialuse permit application was barred by the applicable fouryear statute of limitations. Defending Against Broad Interpretation of A Hotel Tax Exemption The Hotel Room Occupancy Tax (HROT) contains an exemption for personal residents, or occupants of a hotel room or rooms for at least 180 consecutive days. A provision of that exemption was challenged in a recent case handled by the Division. The petitioner in this case, American Airlines, contracted with hotels to rent rooms over a period of time. The company argued that since it was a permanent resident with regard to at least one room that it should receive the exemption for any additional rooms, whether or not those additional rooms were also occupied for 180 consecutive days. The New York City Tax Appeals Tribunal sided with Division attorneys in rejecting this expansive reading of the exemption. The Tribunal also rejected American Airlines’ alternative argument that since it had an ongoing written letter of understanding with the hotels as to procedures and rates, it was in fact a long-term occupant. Steven Levi, Deputy David Santoro, Deputy With 200 attorneys and 200 support staff, the of?ce’s largest division defends the City against over 6,000 new personal injury and property damage cases annually. The Division maintains of?ces in all ?ve boroughs and has special subunits that focus on speci?c issues such as risk management, catastrophic injuries, and toxic torts. of recovery for violation of those interests; and more straightforward negligence cases involving trip-andfalls on s